DoD Multiple Sclerosis, Exploration- Hypothesis Development Award | W81XWH 18 MSRP EHDA

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What is the DoD Multiple Sclerosis (MS) Exploration - Hypothesis Development Award?

The DoD Multiple Sclerosis (MS) Exploration - Hypothesis Development Award (Funding Opportunity Number W81XWH-18-MSRP-EHDA) is a Department of Defense research funding mechanism intended to help investigators test bold, early-stage ideas in the multiple sclerosis field. It is designed to support initial exploration of innovative, high-risk, high-gain concepts that could be transformative for MS research, particularly ideas that are not yet mature enough for more traditional funding programs.

Which government organizations run or administer this opportunity?

This opportunity is run through the Department of Defense (DoD), Department of the Army, U.S. Army Medical Research Acquisition Activity (USAMRAA). It falls within a science and technology / research and development funding category and is associated with CFDA 12.420.

What is the main purpose of this award?

The core purpose is to support the initial exploration of innovative, high-risk, high-gain concepts in MS research. The program aims to lower barriers for unconventional or emerging ideas while still requiring a rigorous, hypothesis-driven approach that can generate interpretable outcomes and guide next steps.

What kind of research is this award intended to support?

The award is specifically geared toward hypothesis-driven research. Applicants are expected to propose a clearly stated, testable hypothesis supported by strong scientific rationale and a thoughtful study design. The intent is to fund early-stage work that explores novel concepts rather than confirming well-established approaches.

Are preliminary data required to apply?

No. A key feature of this award is that preliminary data are not required. This is meant to encourage proposals that are genuinely early-stage or unconventional. However, proposals still need to be scientifically rigorous, with a well-formulated hypothesis and a coherent, defensible experimental plan.

If preliminary data are not required, what does the application still need to demonstrate?

Even without preliminary results, the application is expected to be rigorous. That includes (1) a clearly stated, testable hypothesis, (2) a strong scientific rationale, (3) a thoughtful study design, (4) a coherent and defensible experimental approach, and (5) a project structure that produces interpretable outcomes that can inform future directions.

What does the program mean by "high-risk, high-gain"?

Based on the description provided, "high-risk, high-gain" refers to research ideas that may be speculative or unproven (risk) but have the potential to meaningfully change the way MS problems are understood or approached (gain). The program is positioned to support concepts that might be too early or too unconventional for traditional grant programs, provided they are anchored by a solid hypothesis and credible plan.

How important is innovation in this funding opportunity?

Innovation is described as the central selection theme. Competitive proposals are expected to introduce something genuinely novel, such as a new paradigm, a challenge to prevailing assumptions, a reframing of persistent problems, or a distinctly creative approach that can open new lines of investigation in MS.

What types of projects are less likely to be competitive under this award?

The solicitation draws a firm line between truly novel work and routine extensions of existing research. Projects that primarily add incremental knowledge on top of published findings or ongoing work, or that represent straightforward "next-step" science, are described as less aligned with the program's intent compared to proposals that could shift thinking or create new opportunities for the field.

Who is responsible for explaining why the proposed research is innovative?

The Principal Investigator (PI) is explicitly responsible for explaining, directly and explicitly, what makes the work innovative in the MS research landscape. Reviewers are expected to look for a convincing argument that the project is not merely incremental.

What is the expected outcome of projects funded by this award?

The award is positioned as an entry point to lay the groundwork for future research. The expectation is not necessarily an immediate clinical breakthrough, but rather that the project will meaningfully de-risk a novel idea, establish feasibility signals or conceptual clarity, and provide a foundation for follow-on funding or larger, more definitive studies.

Does the award require that the study deliver an immediate clinical breakthrough?

No. The description emphasizes that the expectation is not necessarily immediate clinical impact, but that the work will produce foundational insights, early findings, feasibility indicators, or conceptual clarity that can propel subsequent research.

What funding instrument types are associated with this opportunity?

The opportunity allowed for either a grant or a cooperative agreement, depending on the government's intended level of involvement.

What does it mean that the opportunity could be a grant or a cooperative agreement?

Based on the information provided, the instrument type (grant versus cooperative agreement) depended on the government's intended level of involvement. The summary does not provide additional operational details beyond that distinction.

What was the funding category and CFDA number listed for this opportunity?

The opportunity sits within a science and technology / research and development category and is associated with CFDA 12.420.

Who was eligible to apply?

Eligibility was described as "unrestricted," meaning it was open to a broad range of applicant organizations, subject to any additional eligibility details that may have been provided in the full announcement text.

How many awards were anticipated?

The opportunity record indicated an anticipated number of about six awards.

When was the opportunity posted and when did it close?

The posting was created on May 4, 2018, and the original closing date was October 18, 2018.

What was the maximum award amount (ceiling) for this opportunity?

The summary record lists the award ceiling as 0. In context, this typically indicates the ceiling was defined elsewhere in the full solicitation or not captured in that database field, rather than implying that no funding was available.

What does it mean that the funding was listed as "discretionary"?

The opportunity was listed as discretionary funding in the provided record. The summary does not provide further detail on what that designation implies operationally beyond the classification.

How should applicants think about the role of this award in a longer research plan?

This award is positioned to help generate early findings, feasibility signals, or foundational insights that support later, larger, or more definitive studies. The strongest applications are described as those that clearly explain what is new, why it matters for MS, and how the work will produce interpretable results that guide the next phase of research.

What makes an application "strong" based on the opportunity description?

Based on the information provided, strong applications typically (1) articulate a clearly stated, testable hypothesis, (2) provide a strong scientific rationale, (3) propose a credible and thoughtful study design that yields interpretable outcomes, (4) make a direct and convincing case for genuine innovation (not incremental extension), and (5) show how the results will lay the groundwork for future research and follow-on funding.